|
|
|
|
On March 4, 1829, many
in the crowd filling the city thought that Providence was smiling
on the country in general and on Washington, D.C., in particular,
for they believed that the resolute will of the people had swept
from office a corrupt administration. The “common man”
had come to the capital to revel in the installation of a popular
champion as chief executive. Washingtonians, generally, were not
so cheerful, deeming the admired champion a backwoods barbarian,
his associates cronies, and his followers an uncivilized horde.
Andrew Jackson had accumulated affectionate nicknames in his colorful
career, a testament to the way other men regarded him: he was
Old Hickory to the sinewy soldiers who had marched with him, the
Hero of New Orleans to a country grateful for his defense of that
city during the War of 1812, and simply “the Gin’ral”
to close friends, family, and the vast number of associates who
had seen to his election. After a brief ceremony at the Capitol
that March day, at 61 years of age he would also officially be
the president of the United States. His enemies winced at the
prospect. His followers, however, could hardly contain their glee,
and, at least for a time, they did not try. The day’s defining
hour, in fact, would not be the unadorned swearing-in at the Capitol.
Instead, it would be when “the majesty of the people”
descended on the presidential “Palace” to pay respects
to the new president. Jackson’s arrival at the house amplified
an already chaotic situation. Renowned visitors greeted him first,
but ordinary folk soon rushed forward to shake his hand and offer
best wishes.
The surging crowd made mingling impossible, and as people pushed
toward Jackson and lunged toward refreshments, they collided with
fragile furniture and shoved servants laden with punch bowls and
trays of food. Waiters trying to maneuver with a large bowl of
spiked orange punch crashed into a crowd and spilled it all on
the carpet. Men in work boots, straining to see Jackson, stood
on expensive upholstered furniture. That such people were even
present at so august an event represented the triumph of democracy
to some. To others, the much-reported mayhem demonstrated the
danger of giving the ungovernable rabble political rights. Both
views were exaggerations. Senator James Hamilton of South Carolina,
a Jackson supporter, struck a balance when he described the event
as a “regular Saturnalia,” but with the qualification
that most of the damage was trivial. The people had gotten out
of hand-Jackson’s opponents thought it an apt evaluation
of the election as well as the inaugural reception-but whether
they had done no real harm in either instance was a matter of
opinion.
His supporters,
provoked by the rancorous election of 1824 and angry over the
vicious campaign of 1828, saw Jackson’s victory
as sweet revenge as well as political vindication. In 1824, the
enormously popular Jackson won pluralities though not majorities
against three Washington insiders in both the popular vote and
the Electoral College. Secretary of State John Quincy Adams
came in second, followed by Secretary of Treasury William H.
Crawford and Speaker of the House Henry Clay. The absence of
a majority in the Electoral College meant the House of Representatives
would choose the president from the top three candidates. Considerable
uncertainty and unseemly political maneuvering clouded the process,
and a Washington wag irreverently compared the matter to a horse
race: “Old Hickory led, closely pushed by Yankee, who
soon locked him, as they have entered the last quarter has
got a half a length a head;-Crawford had been losing for the
two last rounds, but by good jockeying has lately gained upon
the others-if in coming in he can once lock Yankee, he may
jockey him out &
give the race to Hickory.”
The events unfolding in Washington during those first weeks of
1825 were actually even more complex. Jackson later claimed that
Clay, through an intermediary, had offered to secure Jackson’s
selection by the House, but that Jackson instantly rejected such
an arrangement as corrupt. Jackson’s operatives, however,
were feverishly contriving to fix his victory as the House prepared
to vote, and not until Clay offered his support to Adams did the
charge of corruption emerge. When Adams won the House vote and
the presidency, Jackson’s camp immediately assumed that
an unholy alliance between Adams and Clay had blocked the people’s
choice. Jackson wrote his close friend and adviser Maj. William
B. Lewis that he hoped the rumors about a “Barter of office”
were untrue. However, when Adams appointed “Harry of the
West” secretary of state, the most prestigious cabinet post
and widely regarded as the springboard to the presidency, Jackson
was convinced that it was payment for Clay’s support in
the House. Actually, Clay personally disliked the peppery Adams
but found him like-minded regarding the purpose of American government.
Jackson never publicly uttered any accusations about corruption,
but privately he railed that Clay was “the Judas of the
West” who “had closed the contract and will receive
the thirty pieces of silver.” He asked Lewis: “Was
there ever witnessed such a bare faced corruption in any country
before?” It was a cue for supporters with very loud voices,
and what they dubbed the “corrupt bargain” became
their rallying cry for the next four years. Clay and Adams, they
charged, had engaged in “downright bribery & corruption.”
In their own minds, Clay and Adams had good reason for their arrangement.
Clay candidly wondered why “killing 2500 Englishmen at N.
Orleans qualifies for the various, difficult and complicated duties
of the Chief Magistracy.” Adams doubtless agreed that Jackson’s
election would be “fraught with much danger to the character
and security of our institutions.” Yet, whether it was “corrupt,”
innocent, or fashioned from the most altruistic motives, their
bargain amounted to a major political blunder that would haunt
them for the rest of their days. Brokered political deals were
in disfavor by 1825, as evidenced by the suspicion accorded the
congressional caucus that traditionally chose presidential candidates.
Americans’ attitudes toward elections had changed. The average
voter viewed the closed-door process as elitist and demanded more
participation at all levels of the election, from the choice of
the candidate to the balloting in the contest. Across the nation,
states were amending their constitutions to give voters a direct
role in choosing presidential electors, something earlier reserved
for state legislatures. With their actions in 1825, Adams and
Clay disastrously ignored this fundamental change in the American
political ethos. For the next four years, Jackson and his supporters
incessantly reminded the country of the apostasy.
Jackson declared his resolve to prevent “the unprincipled
and wicked” from triumphing over him and the American people
again. His advocates portrayed him as a selfless patriot who repeatedly
left his quiet farm to protect the people from savage Indians,
duplicitous Spaniards, and invading Britons, only to be cheated
out of the presidency for his trouble. Worse, the American people
had been deprived of their legitimate choice for the office. The
Jacksonians forged an angry coalition that extolled local governments
and pledged to limit meddling by the national one.
Jackson became the political heir of Thomas Jefferson; Adams and
Clay became the reprehensible purveyors of discredited Federalist
ideas, promoting central government, restricting state power,
raising tariffs, and appointing grasping bankers to control the
economy.16 Worse, Adams and Clay were smeared as crooked characters
intent on enhancing their power and padding their pockets. Jackson
sniffed that Adams’s inauguration had exhibited a “pomp
and ceremony of guns and drums not very consistent in my Humble
opinion with the character of the occasion.” Jefferson had
needed no such ceremony, he grumbled, choosing even to “ride
his own horse” rather than a stately carriage. (In fact,
Jefferson had walked to his inauguration.)
The charges
about pompous behavior were unfair, but Adams with his New England
reticence and penchant for formality was an easy target. In fact,
Adams was no more inclined to pageantry than were previous presidents.
His years in diplomatic service had exposed him to the exacting
protocols of European courts, and he entertained appropriately
for a head of state. His wife Louisa Catherine, a retiring woman
who dreaded her duties as first lady, nevertheless worked hard
to restore the social aspect of the presidency that had been
injured by the reserve of her predecessor, the somewhat remote
Elizabeth Monroe. Yet, the man the Jacksonians derisively called “Johnny
Q” staggered through his presidency as if in a bad dream
while Jackson’s political operatives did everything in
their power to destroy him. Because active campaigning by candidates
was regarded as unseemly, Jackson remained at the Hermitage,
his home in Tennessee, following the progress of his cause, reading
dozens of newspapers from all over the country, and receiving
reports from countless correspondents. Meanwhile, dinners held
in his honor, tumultuous rallies, and raucous parades encouraged
his candidacy.
Thus primed,
both sides waged an incredibly dirty campaign in 1828. Adams was
portrayed as extravagant and corrupt; Jackson was denounced as
an American Caesar. Worst of all, the dubious circumstances of
Jackson’s marriage were widely broadcast. His legendary
temper was depicted as his defining characteristic. He had fought
duels, killing prominent Nashville attorney Charles Dickinson
in one for insulting his wife. He had brawled in the streets of
Nashville, had threatened to cut off senators’ ears, and
had executed militiamen under his command. The Adams camp hoped
these stories would both persuade the people that Jackson was
unsuitable and provoke him to additional outbursts that would
bolster the impression. With difficulty, Jackson’s handlers
persuaded him to hold his temper. The people tended to ignore
the charges or turned angrily on those who leveled them.
Some historians have attributed Jackson’s landslide victory
in 1828 to the passions generated by personalities rather than
issues, but the behavior of both sides challenges that interpretation.
Jackson’s supporters really did see his victory as the defeat
of special privilege and corruption, in Jackson’s words
a “triumph of the great principle of self government over
the intriguers of aristocracy.” His opponents were equally
conceptual regarding their view of the matter and were as crestfallen
as the Jacksonians were jubilant. “Nothing has ever heretofore
occurred to create in my mind such awful apprehensions of the
permanency of our liberty,” said Henry Clay. Jackson’s
victory, he said, was a “calamity.” The stage was
ominously set for one of the most pivotal inaugurations in the
history of the republic.
Jackson was the first president-elect since George Washington
to be absent from the capital when elected, and because the Senate
would not count and certify the returns until the second Wednesday
of February, waiting for a delegation to summon him would make
him late for his own inauguration. Numerous requests to pause
in every town between Nashville and Washington would, if honored,
lengthen his journey. His supporters not only urged him to hurry
to Washington but also ominously suggested that given the angry
mood of his opponents, extra precautions for his safety were in
order.
As Jackson prepared to leave for Washington, however, his entire
world literally collapsed with the sudden death of his wife Rachel.
During a shopping trip to Nashville, she had learned of the worst
of the accusations made about her during the campaign, scurrilous
attacks Jackson had labored to keep from her. Only a few days
later, she suffered a massive heart attack, and on the night of
December 22, 1828, her kind heart finally gave out. Jackson was
inconsolable and barely able to face his impending journey, let
alone contemplate his looming responsibilities. His devastating
loss cast a shadow over the trip to Washington and everything
that happened for weeks afterward.
Jackson boarded the steamboat Pennsylvania on Monday, January
19, 1829. The boat sported two hickory brooms-a symbol for Jackson’s
plans to sweep corruption out of Washington-and everywhere exultant
crowds greeted his arrival. At Pittsburgh, a shoving mob nearly
crushed him as men scrambled to shake his hand. Obliging them
exhausted him. His health was bad and his mood somber. Dressed
in mourning black, including a black armband and trailing black
band called a “weeper” around his beaver hat, Jackson
resembled a gaunt crow. He grimly frowned on celebrations made
unseemly in his view by his beloved Rachel’s recent death.
Nearing Washington, he insisted that no formal escort accompany
him into the capital. Instead, he entered the city in “a
plain carriage drawn by two horses followed by a single black
servant.”
Installed in John Gadsby’s new, luxurious National Hotel,
Jackson occupied a suite dubbed the “Wigwam,” where
he consulted with advisers. He began receiving hundreds of office
seekers, the first wave of the enormous crowds to come. Many among
those thousands who made this inauguration so memorable came looking
for federal jobs as well. Not since Thomas Jefferson’s self-proclaimed
“Revolution of 1800” had there been such a dramatic
change in the philosophy of governance. Many job hunters, expecting
an equally dramatic change in the personnel of government, circled
Jackson like predators, establishing a custom that would be the
bane of incoming presidents for the rest of the century.
In 1829, Washington society as well as existing federal officeholders
watched the mounting spectacle with uneasiness. Here, after all,
was tangible evidence of the profound social, political, and economic
changes sweeping the country, and the Washington establishment
surveyed the potential for radical change with considerable anxiety.
Although much of the country now relied on Jackson to protect
ordinary citizens’ best interests, others predicted a presidency
ruinous to the nation. To them a man like Adams and a strong central
government were the best guarantors of stability as well as prosperity.
Persistent questions about what was to come contributed to a discomfiting
uncertainty. Jackson remained silent about his plans.
Jackson did choose his cabinet, but his selections, with the
exception of Martin Van Buren as secretary of state, inspired
little confidence. Even supporters gauged the group as an assemblage
of mediocrities. Jackson’s most notorious selection was
his old friend John Eaton for the War Department. Eaton was
not qualified for the post, and his new wife Margaret, the beautiful
daughter of a Washington innkeeper, was the subject of considerable
gossip. Margaret’s
first husband had only recently died at sea, a possible suicide,
when Eaton married her on New Year’s Day 1829 amid rumors
that they had been carrying on an affair. Foreshadowing its
explosion into the “Peggy Eaton Affair,” a scandal
that dominated the first two years of Jackson’s presidency,
Washington society’s criticism of Margaret was a blemish
on the inauguration. Jacksonians bristled at what they considered
an indirect attack on the president-elect, but Washingtonians
saw Jackson’s
cabinet as underscoring his lack of judgment and his appointment
of Eaton as confirming his lack of couth. Unfortunately, not
only the inaugural reception on March 4, 1829, but also some
events leading up to the day reinforced those assessments.
Most telling was Jackson’s treatment of John Quincy Adams.
Although Jackson especially held Clay responsible for the ugly
press attacks on Rachel during the campaign, he did not regard
Adams as blameless. Moreover, Jackson was convinced that Rachel’s
discovery of these reports had contributed to her death. Understandably
bitter, he refused to pay a courtesy call on Adams during the
three weeks before the inauguration. Adams rightly saw Jackson’s
behavior as a deliberate snub and refused to attend the inauguration,
something of an Adams tradition: his father had similarly slighted
Jefferson after the rancorous campaign of 1800. As the inauguration
approached, the two men at most exchanged coldly civil notes.
Adams offered to vacate the White House so Jackson could entertain
there; Jackson replied that Adams should not inconvenience himself.
Adams left the White House on the evening of March 3.
Adams was not missed at the ceremony, certainly not by the thousands
who had assembled in Washington, some even borrowing money to
make the trip. With every room in and around the city occupied,
many people were without bed or board, and pickpockets worked
to deprive them of their cash. “I kept my purse in my pantaloons
pocket with my hand generally on it,” one careful spectator
noted. Lucky for everybody, March 4 dawned clear and warm. A 13-gun
salute signaled the start of festivities as people filled the
streets, particularly Pennsylvania Avenue, an unpaved thoroughfare
divided by a median of poplar trees. Crowds shifted back and forth
seeking the best vantage for a glimpse of Old Hickory.
Jackson emerged from his hotel at 11:00 a.m. Preceded by a guard
of veterans from the Revolutionary War and the battle of New Orleans,
Jackson walked to the Capitol accompanied by his nephew Andrew
Jackson Donelson and Major Lewis. The stroll was more than symbolic
of simple republicanism, emulating as it did Jefferson’s
gesture of 28 years earlier. It was Jackson’s personal statement
of physical fortitude, the triumph of an iron will over a failing
body. Jackson did not wear a hat, and Washington social maven
Margaret Bayard Smith described its absence as befitting “the
Servant in the presence of his Sovereign, the People.” The
crowd flocked to him, marking his progress like a great, turbulent
wave. A multitude awaited him at the Capitol, equally animated
and overwhelming in its growing size. Francis Scott Key, no stranger
to moving patriotic scenes, as his “Star-Spangled Banner”
attests, was left almost speechless by this one. “It is
beautiful,” he exclaimed, “it is sublime!”
Jackson disappeared into the Capitol to witness the installation
of Vice President John C. Calhoun. After that brief ceremony,
he followed a procession of Supreme Court justices and marshals
to the East Portico. As the mass of people caught sight of him,
more than ten thousand “living beings, not a ragged mob,
but well dressed and well behaved respectable and worthy citizens,”
erupted into a deafening roar so intense that the sound itself
had a physical presence.
A groaning ship’s cable strung across the Capitol steps
restrained the crowd as Jackson stepped forward and bowed. The
muffled report of a 24-gun salute fired at the Navy Yard mingled
with a lively rendition of the “President’s March.”
With long, gnarled fingers, Jackson pushed his regular spectacles
to the top of his forehead and donned his reading glasses. He
took his inaugural address out of his pocket and read to the crowd
a speech that contained no promises except the pledge to do his
best for the people. Chief Justice John Marshall administered
the oath of office, and the new president kissed the Bible. He
again bowed to the crowd, triggering a prolonged cacophony of
throaty cheers, whistles, and applause that grew more intense
as the ship’s cable snapped and the throng surged up the
steps toward him. His entourage hurried him back into the Capitol
and ushered him out the west side of the building. There Jackson
mounted a large white horse and rode to the White House through
the churning crowd for the postinaugural reception. The people’s
display of emotion stunned cynical Washington. The depth of feeling
for Jackson and what he represented was perplexing. Senator Daniel
Webster remarked, “Persons have come five hundred miles
to see General Jackson, and they really seem to think that the
country is rescued from some dreadful danger.”
The balance of the day, however, would replace bewilderment with
alarm and restore for sophisticates a comforting cynicism. Washington
elites who regularly attended receptions and dinners at the White
House assumed that President Jackson’s postinaugural party
would be the usual crowded but genteel affair. Yet finely dressed
ladies and gentlemen arriving at the Executive Mansion were shocked.
Hordes of people dressed in homespun and calico were at the White
House acting like invited guests. They had not come to Washington
merely to watch the inauguration; they had come to celebrate Andrew
Jackson, the man who had saved their country at New Orleans and
would now save their government at Washington. Such large numbers
caught the White House steward and servants unprepared. Just as
the house was not large enough to accommodate the unexpected multitude,
Washington society was not discerning enough to understand the
ordinary people who composed it. So it went with its noisy hubbub,
fractured manners, spilled punch, and at least one comic scene
in which a Georgia congressman and his wife escaped the clamor
by climbing out a window. Too many people in too small a space
contributed to an incipient panic, and as the crowd pressed toward
Old Hickory to shake his hand, friends worried about his safety.
Jackson, exhausted and pale, was trapped against a wall before
being shuffled out of the house and back to the National Hotel
for his dinner. Finally, Antoine Michel Giusta, Adams’s
and now Jackson’s steward, dispatched large tubs of whiskey
punch outside to draw the crowd to the lawn and restore order
in the house.
Even those impressed by the unfeigned affection of the thousands
cheering Jackson at his inauguration felt violated by this “reign
of King MOB” at what they considered their social preserve.
As the long lines had continued to enter the White House, Margaret
Bayard Smith found disquieting how quickly “the Majesty
of the People had disappeared” to be replaced by “a
rabble, a mob.” Indeed, Jackson’s enemies seized on
the havoc at the White House so avidly that the reception became
the most memorable part of the inauguration, complete with colorful
exaggerations about the temperament of the crowd and its alleged
penchant for thoughtless vandalism. Most witnesses, however, mentioned
little real damage, and newspapers reported only incidental breakage.
Niles’ Weekly Register, in fact, merely observed that Jackson
had “received the salutations of a vast number of persons,
who came to congratulate him upon his induction to the presidency.”
The anti-Jackson Washington City Chronicle blandly commented that
“the President’s hospitality on this occasion was
in some measure misapplied” and blamed marshals for not
barring the potentially unruly. “The Sovereign People were
a little uproarious, indeed,” reported the Washington Daily
National Intelligencer, “but it was in any thing but a malicious
spirit.” And true enough, some had come for free food and
to gawk at the grand house, but most had gathered to see Andrew
Jackson, celebrating, as Margaret Bayard Smith said, “the
People’s day, and the People’s President,” asserting
the new reality that “the People would rule.”
That reality, though, was the very thing that troubled the established
political class. Broadening democracy-in the eyes of the establishment,
the political faith of the unruly and ungovernable-had placed
Jackson in the presidency. It had also put his rowdy supporters
in the White House, at least for an afternoon. Those who objected
did not wish the people ill; they simply felt themselves better
equipped to govern the country, just as they felt themselves better
suited to attend its fine receptions. The people’s place
was to accept the wisdom of their betters and, most of all, keep
in their place. That attitude’s obsolescence was glaringly
revealed in the deafening cheers of the thousands on Capitol Hill
that March day, and in the broken china and soiled carpets of
the White House that afternoon. Harrumphing gentlemen in tailored
suits and beaver hats and their fainting ladies in fine silks
and rustling petticoats saw the future that day. They did not
like it.
|
|